John,

It takes about 2 weeks from the time you order till you receive your machine.

Mike
http://www.MusicIsLove.com

(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ...
Hev wrote:

This is exactly how I feel about the dinosaurs holding on to the analog
debate.

It is over gentlemen. Stop trying to fix your old analog gear that keeps
breaking down and go digital already.


That's mind-bogglingly stupid. Most of my analog gear is 30, 40 or 50
years old and running fine. It was purchased for pennies on the dollar
and has earned back it's purchase price on one or two jobs.

The digital gear was purchased retail, is now worth pennies on the
dollar, and is a never-ending cycle of software upgrades and other
fixes.

I use digital, and appreciate certain aspects of digital. But anyone
who thinks going all-digital is a big advantage must know very little
about audio.

hollywood_steve wrote:

I use digital, and appreciate certain aspects of digital. But anyone
who thinks going all-digital is a big advantage must know very little
about audio.

I suspect it depends on the market sector that you're in. Down on the low
end, there are folks who consider replacing everything every few years just
to be the normal cost of doing business, and for the bargain basement guys
it probably _is_ a lot more profitable to go all-digital.

Likewise for the film guys who basically operate automation systems with
consoles and recorders as afterthoughts, where again going all-digital is
a big win in spite of the endless "upgrade" path just to stay in place.

But as for me, I don't see the Nagra going away any time soon...
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"hollywood_steve" wrote in message
om...
(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message
...
Hev wrote:

This is exactly how I feel about the dinosaurs holding on to the analog
debate.

It is over gentlemen. Stop trying to fix your old analog gear that
keeps
breaking down and go digital already.


That's mind-bogglingly stupid. Most of my analog gear is 30, 40 or 50
years old and running fine. It was purchased for pennies on the dollar
and has earned back it's purchase price on one or two jobs.


The maintenance and time wasted calibrating analog gear makes your comments
mind-bogglingly stupid. You would be earning much more money per year just
by the time saved. Add up the hours wasted per year at a successful
commercial recording studio calibrating the damn machine for tape brand X at
+3, next client brings in brand Y at +6... it is such an archaic way of
doing things that it won't take long for the dinosaurs to be long gone.

This viewpoint of yours will lead to your demise.


--
-Hev
Find Me He
www.michaelROBOTSspringerBEGONE.com

"hollywood_steve" wrote in message

The maintenance and time wasted calibrating analog gear makes your comments
mind-bogglingly stupid. You would be earning much more money per year just
by the time saved. Add up the hours wasted per year at a successful
commercial recording studio calibrating the damn machine for tape brand X at
+3, next client brings in brand Y at +6... it is such an archaic way of
doing things that it won't take long for the dinosaurs to be long gone.

Takes me about 15 minutes to do a full alignment on the Ampex machines.
You gotta do it every week or so.

The DAT deck? Only needs to be aligned once a year, but it takes long enough
that I just send it to Eddie Ciletti with a couple hundred bucks and let him
do it, because it would cost me more in lost time.

This viewpoint of yours will lead to your demise.

Maybe, but I'm looking at the numbers and I'm still seeing better ROI on the
analogue gear so far. Although I have to admit that the DA-88s have done a
lot better than I ever expected in terms of investment.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
"hollywood_steve" wrote in message

The maintenance and time wasted calibrating analog gear makes your
comments
mind-bogglingly stupid. You would be earning much more money per year
just
by the time saved. Add up the hours wasted per year at a successful
commercial recording studio calibrating the damn machine for tape brand X
at
+3, next client brings in brand Y at +6... it is such an archaic way of
doing things that it won't take long for the dinosaurs to be long gone.

Takes me about 15 minutes to do a full alignment on the Ampex machines.
You gotta do it every week or so.


Then you have a standard tape you always use and the client always has to
use? Don't clients bring various tapes in, used at another studio for
example? You would have to set up the machine everytime that happened. Not
to mention the time of making a back-up of a master reel. Archaic.


This viewpoint of yours will lead to your demise.

Maybe, but I'm looking at the numbers and I'm still seeing better ROI on
the
analogue gear so far. Although I have to admit that the DA-88s have done
a
lot better than I ever expected in terms of investment.


I'm guessing what you have seen with the DA-88 will occur with higher end
digital before too long.


--
Sincerely,

Michael Springer
www.SpringerCo.com
Toll Free: 800-237-0065
Local: 301-949-7399
Fax: 301-949-6893

"Hev" wrote in message
news:q3f9d.10158$r3.8956@trnddc05...

The maintenance and time wasted calibrating analog gear makes your
comments
mind-bogglingly stupid. You would be earning much more money per year just
by the time saved. Add up the hours wasted per year at a successful
commercial recording studio calibrating the damn machine for tape brand X
at
+3, next client brings in brand Y at +6... it is such an archaic way of
doing things that it won't take long for the dinosaurs to be long gone.

There ain't no brand Y no more. It's Quantegy or the highway. A wretched
situation for those of us who liked other tape brands, but it makes the
alignment issue easier.

Also: re-alignment for a client's preferred tape can be billable.

Peace,
Paul

"Paul Stamler" wrote in message
...
"Hev" wrote in message
news:q3f9d.10158$r3.8956@trnddc05...

The maintenance and time wasted calibrating analog gear makes your
comments
mind-bogglingly stupid. You would be earning much more money per year
just
by the time saved. Add up the hours wasted per year at a successful
commercial recording studio calibrating the damn machine for tape brand
X
at
+3, next client brings in brand Y at +6... it is such an archaic way of
doing things that it won't take long for the dinosaurs to be long gone.

There ain't no brand Y no more. It's Quantegy or the highway. A wretched
situation for those of us who liked other tape brands, but it makes the
alignment issue easier.


Gotcha. The calibration problem is still there however. Not every studio
will operate at the same level.
So get out that little tool and calibrate like there ain't no tomorrow
(because there probably won't be one soon).


Also: re-alignment for a client's preferred tape can be billable.


I'm sure that doesn't sit well with clients.



--
Sincerely,

Michael Springer
www.SpringerCo.com
Toll Free: 800-237-0065
Local: 301-949-7399
Fax: 301-949-6893

In article aOf9d.9621$x65.2094@trnddc06, Hev wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message

Takes me about 15 minutes to do a full alignment on the Ampex machines.
You gotta do it every week or so.

Then you have a standard tape you always use and the client always has to
use? Don't clients bring various tapes in, used at another studio for
example? You would have to set up the machine everytime that happened. Not
to mention the time of making a back-up of a master reel. Archaic.

Of course, but you still need to align equipment on a regular basis because
it drifts. And yes, whenever you change tape types or batches of tapes,
you need to spend 15 minutes and realign. The bad thing about analogue is
that it drifts... the good thing is that you can tell how it's drifting and
what is going on. With digital, it drifts but you never notice it until
finally all hell breaks loose.

This viewpoint of yours will lead to your demise.

Maybe, but I'm looking at the numbers and I'm still seeing better ROI on
the
analogue gear so far. Although I have to admit that the DA-88s have done
a
lot better than I ever expected in terms of investment.

I'm guessing what you have seen with the DA-88 will occur with higher end
digital before too long.

Maybe. It depends more on manufacturer support than anything else. When
you spend $50K for a console, you expect to keep it for a long time and
long-term support becomes a big issue. In the digital world, the equipment
cost is very low and the operating cost is very high, in part because the
life cycle on most of the gear is so short. I'm not seeing that change
right now, but Neve has some of the right ideas, and Sony's modular DSD
stuff looks interesting as well in terms of customizability and long-term
repairability.

PCs are a major issue because you basically can't expect to keep a PC running
for a decade with a static configuration. Take a look at what a typical
Pro Tools shop takes in terms of maintenance time to keep the system clean
and updated. On the other end of the scale, take a RADAR install which for
the most part seems to be pretty stable, but whose long-term maintainability
is somewhat questionable. It'll be exciting to see how these systems hold
up on a 15-year depreciation schedule. I'm watching the numbers to see.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
In article aOf9d.9621$x65.2094@trnddc06, Hev
wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message

Takes me about 15 minutes to do a full alignment on the Ampex machines.
You gotta do it every week or so.

Then you have a standard tape you always use and the client always has to
use? Don't clients bring various tapes in, used at another studio for
example? You would have to set up the machine everytime that happened.
Not
to mention the time of making a back-up of a master reel. Archaic.

Of course, but you still need to align equipment on a regular basis
because
it drifts. And yes, whenever you change tape types or batches of tapes,
you need to spend 15 minutes and realign. The bad thing about analogue is
that it drifts... the good thing is that you can tell how it's drifting
and
what is going on. With digital, it drifts but you never notice it until
finally all hell breaks loose.


Scott, please explain to me how digital 'drifts'. As far as I was aware
digital is either on or off, working or not. Where does the drift come in?


This viewpoint of yours will lead to your demise.

Maybe, but I'm looking at the numbers and I'm still seeing better ROI
on
the
analogue gear so far. Although I have to admit that the DA-88s have
done
a
lot better than I ever expected in terms of investment.

I'm guessing what you have seen with the DA-88 will occur with higher end
digital before too long.

Maybe. It depends more on manufacturer support than anything else. When
you spend $50K for a console, you expect to keep it for a long time and
long-term support becomes a big issue. In the digital world, the
equipment
cost is very low and the operating cost is very high, in part because the
life cycle on most of the gear is so short. I'm not seeing that change
right now, but Neve has some of the right ideas, and Sony's modular DSD
stuff looks interesting as well in terms of customizability and long-term
repairability.

PCs are a major issue because you basically can't expect to keep a PC
running
for a decade with a static configuration. Take a look at what a typical
Pro Tools shop takes in terms of maintenance time to keep the system clean
and updated. On the other end of the scale, take a RADAR install which
for
the most part seems to be pretty stable, but whose long-term
maintainability
is somewhat questionable. It'll be exciting to see how these systems hold
up on a 15-year depreciation schedule. I'm watching the numbers to see.


Very good point. Obviously computers are going to need maintenance as well,
and upgrading is a must to stay current (for now). But I think companies
will create stable systems in the near future that are capable of recording
enough tracks at very high level of quality. And I think those machines will
be engineered to stick around for a while... meaning years of use from the
same machine. A 15 year depreciation??? Maybe... but I think I would be
satisfied to get 5-7 years out of a machine without having to mess with it
much.


--
-Hev
Find Me He
www.michaelROBOTSspringerBEGONE.com

In article I7i9d.9732$x65.9340@trnddc06, Hev wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
what is going on. With digital, it drifts but you never notice it until
finally all hell breaks loose.

Scott, please explain to me how digital 'drifts'. As far as I was aware
digital is either on or off, working or not. Where does the drift come in?

As long as there is mechanical stuff and electronic stuff, there is a
need for alignment.

With a DAT deck, you need to tear the transport down about once a year, put
the alignment tape on, and go through the tape path adjustments to make sure
the square wave at the head (the eye pattern) is really square. You do
similar things with CD-R transports, larger digital recorders, and the like.

You can ignore the alignment, and the eye pattern will get worse and worse
as the machine drifts out of alignment. You won't notice it until it's too
late and the machine all of a sudden conks out and you have to cancel a
session and forfeit the deposit. That's why maybe once a month you should
check the error rate on the machine and write it into the equipment log
so you have some notion of how the machine is drifting and how long you
have before it's alignment time.

To a lesser extent there is some alignment that needs to be done on
many converters too. When I pop open my Prism A/D, there are a bunch
of little pots inside there that are part of either the analogue front
end or part of the ladder stages itself. Every once in a while they
need to be adjusted for best linearity, and sadly it's not a 15 minute
scope-and-signal-generator procedure like aligning the Ampex. Then again,
it's an every-few-years thing rather than an every-week thing.

Very good point. Obviously computers are going to need maintenance as well,
and upgrading is a must to stay current (for now). But I think companies
will create stable systems in the near future that are capable of recording
enough tracks at very high level of quality. And I think those machines will
be engineered to stick around for a while... meaning years of use from the
same machine. A 15 year depreciation??? Maybe... but I think I would be
satisfied to get 5-7 years out of a machine without having to mess with it
much.

I'm waiting to see. Systems like RADAR are certainly a step in that
direction. With DSD coming in, though, or maybe not coming in, folks
are not willing to put out big capital investment in hardware that might
be obsolete before it's installed and nobody can really predict what is
happining there. It might be like 1" 12-track all over again, but then
again it might be the new industry standard.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

In article q3f9d.10158$r3.8956@trnddc05 writes:

The maintenance and time wasted calibrating analog gear makes your comments
mind-bogglingly stupid. You would be earning much more money per year just
by the time saved.

Is everyone with cheap digital gear so busy tha they'd really make
more money in a year if they didn't have to do any maintenance? I
doubt it.

And on another hand, it takes about as long to align a 24 track
recorder (that doesn't need fixing in the process) as it does to
install a new piece of software. But it's rare that the process leaves
the recorder unusable. Often enough so that pepole talk about it,
installing a new program requires fixing things (or getting other
things) before the system is ready to use again. That's a real waste
of time.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article Deg9d.12291$na.6246@trnddc04 writes:

Gotcha. The calibration problem is still there however. Not every studio
will operate at the same level.
So get out that little tool and calibrate like there ain't no tomorrow
(because there probably won't be one soon).

This is why we put reference tones at the head of a tape. It's no
different than knowing that the tape is recorded at 15 or 30 ips, or
that a digital file is 44.1 or 48 kHz (or maybe 192 kHz, which my
hardware won't play at all)

Also: re-alignment for a client's preferred tape can be billable.
I'm sure that doesn't sit well with clients.

I've never had an objection. You don't list it as a separate item,
time is time. You do it while the client is using his setup time
(which, while it appears on the bill or not, is still billable if you
want to stay in the black) or getting his guitar in tune.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article I7i9d.9732$x65.9340@trnddc06 writes:

Obviously computers are going to need maintenance as well,
and upgrading is a must to stay current (for now). But I think companies
will create stable systems in the near future that are capable of recording
enough tracks at very high level of quality.

There's the flurry of 24-track hard disk recorders that we saw appear
in 1998-2000. (The original Anatek RADAR was a few years earlier,
scalable from 8 tracks up to 24) You can still buy a few of them, and
a few others have gone by the wayside, but sales are very slow. In
fact they never sold like gangbusters because they came out just about
the same time as computer-based audio recording software and hardware
(as well as different styles of working that didn't involve 24
simultaniously available inputs and outputs) and today sales are down
to a trickle. (Barry of iZ who's probaby still lurking here - feel
free to contribute to the history)

However, there really isn't a lot of future in this technology.
Eventually the manufacturers figure that the machines do all they're
supposed to do pretty well, and the users have become accustomed to
the bugs and quirks. The hardware is fixed, so the software can only
be updated so far, and the manufacturers stop issuing updates and move
on to something else. Both Mackie and TASCAM are leaning more heavily
on control surface products than dedicated recorders.

And I think those machines will
be engineered to stick around for a while... meaning years of use from the
same machine. A 15 year depreciation??? Maybe... but I think I would be
satisfied to get 5-7 years out of a machine without having to mess with it
much.

That's probably reasonable if you're busy and if you stay in business
that long (or just like to have fun). A $30,000 recorder that works
for 30 years is about the same as a $5,000 recorder that works for
five years, and I suspect that the end-of-life value is about the same
percentage of its intitial cost, maybe 7 to 10 percent. But the
"discharge curve" of the digital recorders is steeper, losing its
value faster early in life rather than later. So software maintenance
stops (though there may be some hardware maintenance, at least as long
as proprietary parts are available), but so does the capability.
You'll never be able to EQ, compress, or time stretch a track on a
Mackie HDR24/96, which is something that can be done on any garden
variety DAW these days. Still, it's a very convenient way to work in a
tracking studio (remember those?).

I suppose this is as good an opportunity as any to flog my new book:
"The Last Mackie Hard Disk Recorder Manual". It explains features and
changes in the last software update (about two years ago now) that
were never covered by an updated manual or addendum, as well as
modifications and maintenance tips to get some more useful life out of
the HDR24/96 and MDR24/96.

Order it from http://www.cafepress.com/mikerivers

Download a PDF of the Table of Contents at
http://members.aol.com/mikerivers

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1097236165k@trad...

In article Deg9d.12291$na.6246@trnddc04 writes:

Gotcha. The calibration problem is still there however. Not every studio
will operate at the same level.
So get out that little tool and calibrate like there ain't no tomorrow
(because there probably won't be one soon).

This is why we put reference tones at the head of a tape. It's no
different than knowing that the tape is recorded at 15 or 30 ips, or
that a digital file is 44.1 or 48 kHz (or maybe 192 kHz, which my
hardware won't play at all)


Even with the tones you still have to calibrate every channel to setup the
machine. I know it isn't going to make or break a studio...

I guess I just had a bad experience. I interned at a studio that was
primarily analog (24 track 2 inch) and it was just a mess. Every 24 track
recorder had at least one track down at any given time (usually 2 or 3) and
the engineers were constantly calibrating machines for different tape and
ordering expensive replacement parts. For a young guy like me it was mind
boggling to watch 'professionals' having to deal with such situations. It
seems like studios really do have to play off of an image to gain a
customers trust and confidence (a game of sorts), and this would probably
send a young band running for the closest Pro Tools rig in someones
basement. I guess I made my mind up about analog at that point.

On a totally different note: Rivers, you ******* for getting the cicadas
recorded!! I had actually placed an order for a Marantz PMD670 for that
purpose but the damn thing was backordered. Maybe it will available before
17 years time. g



--

-Hev
find me he
www.michaelSCREWspringerROBOTS.com

Hev wrote:

I guess I just had a bad experience. I interned at a studio that was
primarily analog (24 track 2 inch) and it was just a mess. Every 24 track
recorder had at least one track down at any given time (usually 2 or 3) and
the engineers were constantly calibrating machines for different tape and
ordering expensive replacement parts. For a young guy like me it was mind
boggling to watch 'professionals' having to deal with such situations. It
seems like studios really do have to play off of an image to gain a
customers trust and confidence (a game of sorts), and this would probably
send a young band running for the closest Pro Tools rig in someones
basement. I guess I made my mind up about analog at that point.

Yup. I suggest interning at a studio with Pro Tools and seeing the same
sort of thing going on. Either you do proper preventative maintenance, or
you live with stuff falling apart all around you. There are a lot of studios,
both digital and analogue, in that last category.

On a totally different note: Rivers, you ******* for getting the cicadas
recorded!! I had actually placed an order for a Marantz PMD670 for that
purpose but the damn thing was backordered. Maybe it will available before
17 years time. g

I'm still pulling dead ones out of my gutters. In the meantime, ask me
in 17 years and I'll loan you a Nagra. On the other hand, the Marantz may
still be working then... I kind of doubt my HHb Portadat will be but it'll
be interesting to see if there's any media at all for the thing in a couple
years.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
Hev wrote:

I guess I just had a bad experience. I interned at a studio that was
primarily analog (24 track 2 inch) and it was just a mess. Every 24 track
recorder had at least one track down at any given time (usually 2 or 3)
and
the engineers were constantly calibrating machines for different tape and
ordering expensive replacement parts. For a young guy like me it was mind
boggling to watch 'professionals' having to deal with such situations. It
seems like studios really do have to play off of an image to gain a
customers trust and confidence (a game of sorts), and this would probably
send a young band running for the closest Pro Tools rig in someones
basement. I guess I made my mind up about analog at that point.

Yup. I suggest interning at a studio with Pro Tools and seeing the same
sort of thing going on. Either you do proper preventative maintenance, or
you live with stuff falling apart all around you. There are a lot of
studios,
both digital and analogue, in that last category.


Good advice, I certainly would gain from that experience. All the experience
I have had with digital recording systems have been pretty stable once
operating systems have been 'tuned' for pro audio use. That is not to say
issues won't occur when adding new hardware or software.

So who are the players that have created custom operating systems for audio?
Is there a proprietory pro audio operating system? If there isn't there
should be...


On a totally different note: Rivers, you ******* for getting the cicadas
recorded!! I had actually placed an order for a Marantz PMD670 for that
purpose but the damn thing was backordered. Maybe it will available
before
17 years time. g

I'm still pulling dead ones out of my gutters. In the meantime, ask me
in 17 years and I'll loan you a Nagra. On the other hand, the Marantz may
still be working then... I kind of doubt my HHb Portadat will be but it'll
be interesting to see if there's any media at all for the thing in a
couple
years.

The last time the cicadas were around I was in elementary school and the
kids chased me around with them. Scarred for life! Even grasshoppers give me
the willies still.
Scott... I'm on the east coast in the DC area. I know they have cicadas
elsewhere in the country... what part of the country are you in to have the
privilege of dealing with the red eyed buggers?


--
-Hev
Find Me He
www.michaelROBOTSspringerBEGONE.com

In article writes:

I guess I just had a bad experience. I interned at a studio that was
primarily analog (24 track 2 inch) and it was just a mess. Every 24 track
recorder had at least one track down at any given time (usually 2 or 3) and
the engineers were constantly calibrating machines for different tape and
ordering expensive replacement parts.

That's too bad. Maybe the engineers weren't really maintenance people
and didn't know how to do anything but check and adjust levels. It
happens, particularly when things go downhill, skilled people retire
or move on to something else, and young technicans don't get the
training to attack a maintenance problem. Stan Jacox was talking with
me and a couple of others a few years back about setting up a studio
maintenance course, but there just didn't seem to be the potential for
enough students (though you've given a very good example of the need).

On a totally different note: Rivers, you ******* for getting the cicadas
recorded!! I had actually placed an order for a Marantz PMD670 for that
purpose but the damn thing was backordered. Maybe it will available before
17 years time. g

In 17 years, I doubt that the Compact Flash card recorder will be in
vogue, but I'm sure something else will. Check in every few years and
see what's out there that you can use.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Here's one httlp://www.musicislove.com

geoff

"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message
...
Here's one httlp://www.musicislove.com

geoff


Ooops, works better without the "L"

http://www.musicislove.com

(Mike Rivers) wrote in news:znr1097237530k@trad:

I suppose this is as good an opportunity as any to flog my new book:
"The Last Mackie Hard Disk Recorder Manual". It explains features and
changes in the last software update (about two years ago now) that
were never covered by an updated manual or addendum, as well as
modifications and maintenance tips to get some more useful life out of
the HDR24/96 and MDR24/96.

Order it from http://www.cafepress.com/mikerivers

Download a PDF of the Table of Contents at
http://members.aol.com/mikerivers

I've already gotten my 12 month for $1200 out of my Mackie SDR 24/96, and
it's still going strong. I use it to capture tracks on location and bring
them back for processing on the DAW.

Does you book offer anything useful on the SDR?

In article 1 writes:

I've already gotten my 12 month for $1200 out of my Mackie SDR 24/96, and
it's still going strong. I use it to capture tracks on location and bring
them back for processing on the DAW.

Does you book offer anything useful on the SDR?

Sorry, no. The SDR is a totally different animal from the HDR and MDR
and it would require a book on its own. However, the manuals for the
SDR are pretty much up to date and they're so simple inside that
anyone inclined to do something like swap out the disk drive can just
do it.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article pNy9d.9$j15.0@trnddc07, Hev wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote:
Yup. I suggest interning at a studio with Pro Tools and seeing the same
sort of thing going on. Either you do proper preventative maintenance, or
you live with stuff falling apart all around you. There are a lot of
studios,
both digital and analogue, in that last category.

Good advice, I certainly would gain from that experience. All the experience
I have had with digital recording systems have been pretty stable once
operating systems have been 'tuned' for pro audio use. That is not to say
issues won't occur when adding new hardware or software.

In the short term, they are all very stable. In the long term, you either
do maintenance, or you do repairs.

And when you get behind the repair curve, things start snowballing. One of
the things about analogue gear, though, is that most failures (other than
power supply failures) aren't catastrophic. You can lose one channel or
lose one output and still keep functioning. This is an advantage in the
short term because it lets you work around problems, but it's a disadvantage
in the long term because it makes it that much more tempting to ignore them.

With more modular digital systems coming down the pike, hopefully digital
gear is going to be this way too. The Neve Capricorn is one example of
a nicely distributed system... you can lose big chunks and still keep
operating.

So who are the players that have created custom operating systems for audio?
Is there a proprietory pro audio operating system? If there isn't there
should be...

As far as I know, BeOS is pretty much the only player there, and aside from
getting embedded in the Mackie recorders, I don't know how much real market
share they have. There are some small realtime operating systems out there
like pSOS and the like; dbx has their own proprietary kernal that they have
embedded in their standalone dsp boxes. But I don't think any of these really
have much market share, which is a lot of the problem. I think dedicated
operating systems would do more to improve the long-term stability of
computerized audio gear than anything else.

Scott... I'm on the east coast in the DC area. I know they have cicadas
elsewhere in the country... what part of the country are you in to have the
privilege of dealing with the red eyed buggers?

I'm in Williamsburg, about three hours south of you and Mike Rivers.
To be honest, we didn't get anywhere near the cicada population here that
my wife got up in Beltsville. It was really amazing up there.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

In article q3f9d.10158$r3.8956@trnddc05,
"Hev" wrote:
The maintenance and time wasted calibrating analog gear makes your comments
mind-bogglingly stupid. You would be earning much more money per year just
by the time saved. Add up the hours wasted per year at a successful
commercial recording studio calibrating the damn machine for tape brand X at
+3, next client brings in brand Y at +6... it is such an archaic way of
doing things that it won't take long for the dinosaurs to be long gone.

This viewpoint of yours will lead to your demise.

Digital has no free lunch either. I spend lots and lots of time doing
backups, maintaining filesystems, and updating / maintaining software
for my hard disk systems. This summer, I spent quite a bit of free time
building a nearline backup server, and unfortunately, this sort of stuff
is not directly billable, but assumed to be "in place" by my clients.
Yes, it makes my task easier, but it all adds up one way or another.

It's actually a lot simpler to have a client take a reel with them than
for me to maintain and archive their data on hard disk. It's also a lot
simpler to do an alignment, which will be the same thing over and over
again, than it is to keep up with the various bugs and nonfunctional
software versions that pop up every so often.

The bottom line is that professionals take care of the details and that
hobbyists don't. This applies to analog and digital equally. Back when
this city was primarily analog, it was rare for anyone internal to most
of the medium to low end rooms to even know how to do an alignment.
Yes, they didn't get done that often...

AFAIK, nothing's really changed: the low end rooms here still don't do
enough maintenance and the digital rooms push the data maintenance
requirement onto customers by having them maintain their own firewire
drives, which means there is actually no backup. Heck, I don't even
know anyone but me who verifies each and every data copy made. Most
just let it run and assume it was 100% accurate, when we all know that
reality can intervene.


Just my $.02...

Monte McGuire

(Mike Rivers) wrote in news:znr1097237530k@trad:


That's probably reasonable if you're busy and if you stay in business
that long (or just like to have fun). A $30,000 recorder that works
for 30 years is about the same as a $5,000 recorder that works for
five years, and I suspect that the end-of-life value is about the same
percentage of its intitial cost, maybe 7 to 10 percent. But the
"discharge curve" of the digital recorders is steeper, losing its
value faster early in life rather than later. So software maintenance
stops (though there may be some hardware maintenance, at least as long
as proprietary parts are available), but so does the capability.
You'll never be able to EQ, compress, or time stretch a track on a
Mackie HDR24/96, which is something that can be done on any garden
variety DAW these days. Still, it's a very convenient way to work in a
tracking studio (remember those?).


I've not been overly happy with the straight-to-DAW approach - we often
end up tracking via an analog board to a Tascam 24 track (those hard disk
things that sell at a trickle now - with very nice A/D, all the benefits
of "normal" tracking, but no waiting for tape to roll), then pop out the
scsi drive, pop it in the PC, and import to the DAW for all the
automation, time stretch, EQ, and slick compression that we need. It's
not a bad workflow, and I think it uses each piece of equipment to
advantage, although the improvements in control surfaces may change that.
I just haven't seen a control surface as nice as a decent analog board
(yet, and I'm probably a bit behind in current products).

Greg

In article ,
says...
(Mike Rivers) wrote in news:znr1097237530k@trad:


That's probably reasonable if you're busy and if you stay in business
that long (or just like to have fun). A $30,000 recorder that works
for 30 years is about the same as a $5,000 recorder that works for
five years, and I suspect that the end-of-life value is about the same
percentage of its intitial cost, maybe 7 to 10 percent. But the
"discharge curve" of the digital recorders is steeper, losing its
value faster early in life rather than later. So software maintenance
stops (though there may be some hardware maintenance, at least as long
as proprietary parts are available), but so does the capability.
You'll never be able to EQ, compress, or time stretch a track on a
Mackie HDR24/96, which is something that can be done on any garden
variety DAW these days. Still, it's a very convenient way to work in a
tracking studio (remember those?).


I've not been overly happy with the straight-to-DAW approach - we often
end up tracking via an analog board to a Tascam 24 track (those hard disk
things that sell at a trickle now - with very nice A/D, all the benefits
of "normal" tracking, but no waiting for tape to roll), then pop out the
scsi drive, pop it in the PC, and import to the DAW for all the
automation, time stretch, EQ, and slick compression that we need. It's
not a bad workflow, and I think it uses each piece of equipment to
advantage,

That's the way we do it, with a Mackie SDR. Going direct 20
channels into the PC has always - ALWAYS - given us problems,
even though we've been through about 10 different PCs, and the
keyboardist and drummer are IT pros. It's simply more productive
to work this way, unfortunately.
---Michael (of APP)...
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/6/au...plantmusic.htm

In article writes:

I've not been overly happy with the straight-to-DAW approach - we often
end up tracking via an analog board to a Tascam 24 track (those hard disk
things that sell at a trickle now

pop out the
scsi drive, pop it in the PC, and import to the DAW for all the
automation, time stretch, EQ, and slick compression that we need. It's
not a bad workflow, and I think it uses each piece of equipment to
advantage, although the improvements in control surfaces may change that.
I just haven't seen a control surface as nice as a decent analog board
(yet, and I'm probably a bit behind in current products).

Actually one of the best control surfaces for a DAW was one of the
first, the Mackie Hui. It had nice feeling motorized faders, usable
metering, sensible monitoring - and it was as expensive as you'd
expect a ProTools accessory to be. The HUI protocol kind of limited
itself in that it's defined for only eight faders with bank switching.
That worked OK when people were recording 8 to 16 tracks, but with
most DAW projects going into an unconscionable number of tracks,
people want at least 24 faders before they have to switch banks.

The trouble with standards is that sometimes they work against you.
There was never a HUI-2. Even Mackie's HUI emulation for the d8b
console (something that came with the last software release) only uses
eight of the 24 channel faders on the console.

There are a number of new work surfaces (ranging from a Behringer for
a couple hundred bucks to a $90,000 "mini" SSL) but there are more
cheap ones than really nice feeling and expensive ones.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

IDE drives go into Firewire and USB external enclosures. Think of
those boxes as IDEUSB/Firewire translation gadgets.

Maybe they have SATA Firewire/USB external enclosures these days. But
the basic idea on them has been if you open one up, it's just an IDE
drive in there.

I swap different drives in and out of it all the time. In fact, I
don't bother even bolting it back together.


I just want to make a final point that the computer is the absoloute
center of the modern studio. Hence, I can't think of a better place
to invest in technical knowledge skills.